BFD implementation in 1.4.0

[Mikhail A. Grishin]

Ondrej,

Looks like you misunderstood me.
This is broken not from the BIRD. This is broken from Cisco/Juniper - 
such devices inserts wrong SRC IP in BFD packets.

Do you still need info that you requested?

P.S. Later we found that in older JunOS problem is present, but in newer 
versions of JunOS all is fine. Regarding Cisco some of our customers 
keep trying to open case at Cisco TAC.

Ondrej Zajicek wrote, 02.09.2014 15:38:
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 03:39:32PM +0400, Mikhail A. Grishin wrote:
>> Hi,
> ...
>> Then we tried to migrate this BFD sessions to our production route servers
>> and faced with issues related to our network infrastructure. We have two
>> separate IP networks at the same VLAN. Each customer has 2 peering IP: from
>> the first IP subnet, and from the second. One IP assigned as primary,
>> another as secondary at the same interface on customer side.
>>
>> Problem:
>> Routers of our customers able to communicate in terms of BFD only with Route
>> Server located in the same IP subnet with primary IP address on their
>> interface. With the Route Server in another IP subnet they can't communicate
>> in terms of BFD because SRC IP address for BFD packets is wrong, equal to
>> primary IP, not secondary.
>
> Hi
>
> This should work automatically - BFD should use same src, dst IP
> addresses as associated BGP session (assuming that BFD session was
> requested by BGP and not explicitly configured using 'neighbor' in BFD
> protcol).
>
> There are several possible ways how it could be broken, so i need
> some info:
>
> 1) What is BIRD version and OS (Linux/BSD)?
>
> 2) What local IP addresses are reported for BGP sessions?
>     ('Source address' in 'show protocols all')
>     Correct one or bad one?
>
> 3) Is BGP source address explicitly configured in BGP protocol?
>     ('local IP as NUM' instead of 'local as NUM')
>     If not, could you try to set it and see if anything changes?
>


-- 
Best regards,
Mikhail A. Grishin <m.grishin at msk-ix.ru>